The body was on the pointed rocks alongside the stream. The artist might have fallen from the cliff where he was painting, but there are too many suspicious elements -- particularly the medical evidence that proves he'd been dead nearly half a day, though eyewitnesses had seen him alive a scant hour earlier. And then there are the six prime suspects -- all of them artists,The body was on the pointed rocks alongside the stream. The artist might have fallen from the cliff where he was painting, but there are too many suspicious elements -- particularly the medical evidence that proves he'd been dead nearly half a day, though eyewitnesses had seen him alive a scant hour earlier. And then there are the six prime suspects -- all of them artists, all of whom wished him dead. Five are red herrings, but one has created a masterpiece of murder that baffles everyone, including Lord Peter Wimsey.

1/8 The Body In The BurnLord Peter Wimsey's Scottish fishing is curtailed by the death of a local artist.His Lordship and faithful Bunter investigate.

2/8 DisappearancesLord Peter Wimsey investigates the death of a Scottish artist but the key suspects keep disappearing.

3/8 BicyclesLord Peter Wimsey's investigations of the death of an artist are complicated by the disappearance of several bicycles.

4/8 Bunter InvestigatesLord Peter Wimsey's faithful manservant, Bunter, takes the initiative in the investigation of the murder of a Scottish artist.

5/8 AlibisLord Peter Wimsey sets about verifying the alibis of the key suspects in the murder of a Scottish artist.

6/8 Evidence Of A Commercial TravellerLord Peter Wimsey pores over the evidence and sifts the clues to establish who murdered a Scottish artist.

7/8 Council Of WarThere are many theories in the case of a murdered Scottish artist, but Lord Peter Wimsey is the man to get to the bottom of it.

8/8 ReconstructionLord Peter Wimsey and his 'council of war' reconstruct the final hours of a murdered Scottish artist....more

Ah, the Wimsey book I never liked. I like it better now, but I still think it lacks something of the other books. Wimsey is in Scotland, presumably getting away from it all (it, by now, meaning Harriet Vane, who was in the last book). Somewhat incongruously, he is hanging out in an artists' community, when one of the painters, an argumentative bugger called Campbell, is found dead. And Wimsey immediately knWhere I got the book: purchased (used) on Amazon. Continuing my Lord Peter Wimsey re-read.

Ah, the Wimsey book I never liked. I like it better now, but I still think it lacks something of the other books. Wimsey is in Scotland, presumably getting away from it all (it, by now, meaning Harriet Vane, who was in the last book). Somewhat incongruously, he is hanging out in an artists' community, when one of the painters, an argumentative bugger called Campbell, is found dead. And Wimsey immediately knows he's murdered, because of a detail that you really have to have read the book once before to understand - foreknowledge makes the whole of the book much clearer. I always kind of resented Sayers for not giving the reader that clue early on, because after all isn't the whole point of a classic murder mystery that the reader has ALL the facts presented to them?

So we end up with six suspects, all painters, and the novel goes into excruciating detail examining the movements and motives of each of them. Railway timetables and other kinds of timetable are much in evidence, making this a hard read. In addition many of the characters speak in broad Scots, and peersonally ah'm no verra guid at followin' sich a mess o' dialogue, ye ken. Worse, we even have one witness who talkth like thith - I think Sayers is indicating here that the gentleman is Jewish, as she was cheerfully bigoted after the manner of her generation.

And yet if you have the patience to wade through the Scots and the timetables and all the business about bicycles, it's a very clever mystery. Although Wimsey solves it NOT on the strength of all the miles and miles of careful reconstruction of the crime but on the strength of the aforementioned unspoken clue, which means that basically the entire middle 4/5 of the book is a RED HERRING, so yeesh.

For Wimsey devotees there are also some nice little character touches, foreshadowing the deepening of character that was to come in the other Wimsey/Vane books. So for me it was fun to encounter what almost came across as new information. And, of course, cleverly written, although the older I get the more I notice the instability of POV that haunts the books. But, you see, DLS had the trick of making us into drooling Wimsey fans, showing the power of a damn good character to make up for any amount of technical faults....more

I Remember: surely Sayers can do better... the intriguing mystery gets lost in the unceasingly tedious recounting of all the various permutations of a train schedule... chapter after chapter of train schedules... TRAIN SCHEDULE, TRAIN SCHEDULES, STOP IT ALREADY!... where are the suspects?... oh there they are, only took a half a book to get to them... some good lines here and there... the characters of Wimsey & Bunter remain wonderful but are given little play.

In the second chapter of ‘Five Red Herrings’, as Lord Peter Wimsey examines the newly discovered corpse, he starts to frantically look around for a specific item. A police sergeant asks him what he’s hunting for – and the following paragraph appears in parenthesis:

“Here Lord Peter Wimsey told the Sergeant what he was looking for and why, but as the intelligent reader will readily supply these details for himself, they are omitted from this page.”

Now I would say that virtually no reader is goingIn the second chapter of ‘Five Red Herrings’, as Lord Peter Wimsey examines the newly discovered corpse, he starts to frantically look around for a specific item. A police sergeant asks him what he’s hunting for – and the following paragraph appears in parenthesis:

“Here Lord Peter Wimsey told the Sergeant what he was looking for and why, but as the intelligent reader will readily supply these details for himself, they are omitted from this page.”

Now I would say that virtually no reader is going to be able to guess what the sleuthing peer is actually searching for (it isn’t even mentioned in the text before this point), and since it proves to be absolutely crucial to how Winsey carries out his investigation, this omission is therefore cheating. It is a highly inelegant trick and terribly unfair on Sayers’ part. After all the reader is supposed to be given a shot at solving the case for themselves, and having such an important piece of information hidden away makes the entire book – which does have a great deal that’s entertaining within it – feel like a bit of con.

You won’t need to be one of detective fiction’s great operators then, to note that I am still somewhat ambivalent about Dorothy L. Sayers and Lord Peter Wimsey. And that’s a shame as there’s a lot here that I liked. The setting is a small community in Scotland where there are seemingly dozens of painters. When a particularly objectionable member of their breed is slain, there are six obvious suspects – five of whom are red herrings. The mechanics of them all having dodgy alibis is incredibly well done, the setting is nicely evoked and there are some wonderful lines – for example, a Police Inspector answering questions with “the resentful accent of a schoolboy burdened with too much homework.”

There is also a nice post-modern element to this 1931 mystery. It’s noted which characters have mystery books they could have purloined ideas from; a ‘red herring’ itself is of course a term used far more often in detective novels than in actual detecting; while towards the end of the book, when Wimsey raises the possibility of the killer not being one of the six, he is chastised for being like the worst kind of detective fiction. It’s interesting that even this early in the detective novel’s surge to the top, the genre was capable of reaching in to itself.

On the down side it does tip its hat as to whodunit a tad too early, and I could have down without the renderings of Scottish dialect from the more menial characters. And then of course there’s the fact that Sayers doesn’t play by the rules as far as the reader is concerned. But if you go into the mystery forearmed on that point, having steeled yourself adequately, you should find that there’s a lot between these covers to give you pleasure. ...more

This book has a fun setup, from a mystery aspect: in a small artist's community in Scotland, a man named Campbell is found dead at the base of a cliff, having apparently fallen to his death. But it wasn't an accident, obviously, and soon the local police, aided by his wonderfulness Lord Peter Wimsey, are on the case. There are some complications: Campbell has multiple enemies in the town, the six most likely suspects all have alibis for the time of death, and although Campbell was killed sometimThis book has a fun setup, from a mystery aspect: in a small artist's community in Scotland, a man named Campbell is found dead at the base of a cliff, having apparently fallen to his death. But it wasn't an accident, obviously, and soon the local police, aided by his wonderfulness Lord Peter Wimsey, are on the case. There are some complications: Campbell has multiple enemies in the town, the six most likely suspects all have alibis for the time of death, and although Campbell was killed sometime on Monday night, multiple witnesses saw him painting on the cliff the next day.

The investigation isn't terribly compelling. Dissecting the multiple alibis involves a lot of discussion about trains and schedules, which becomes mind-numbingly boring and impossible to follow after the second paragraph. Other reviews tell me that when The Five Red Herrings was written, so-called "train timetable" mysteries were all the rage, and Dorothy Sayers wrote this book mainly to prove that she could do the same. She shouldn't have bothered - the constant, lengthy monologues about "Well, if he took the 2:35 to Blahdiblah, that would give him just enough time to catch the 4:15 out of Whocares, but if he took the 1:55 like he said, that would mean it would take him nearly two hours to reach Nobodygivesafuck! Great Scott!" are boring, and I still have no idea how the various timetables worked out. The six suspects are pretty much interchangeable, to the extent that any one of them could have been named as the murderer and it wouldn't have changed anything. Also, there's a frustrating bit at the beginning when Wimsey examines the crime scene. Something is missing from the scene, Wimsey declares, and it's because of this object's absence that he knows the death was murder. What is this object, you ask? Here's what Dorothy Sayers says, right after Wimsey's revelation: "(Here Lord Peter Wimsey told the Sergeant what he was to look for and why, but as the intelligent reader will readily supply these details for himself, they are emitted from this page.)"

Come on, Sayers! Okay, obviously we aren't actually expected to know what the missing object is (otherwise she would have just told us, because if it was that obvious there wouldn't be any reason to hide it), but couldn't she have chosen a less-frustrating way to keep the information from the readers? I was actually able to guess what the missing object was by the time I was 2/3 through the book, but to be fair, Sayers drops some pretty big hints about what we should be looking for. So ultimately I guess the missing clue was a good choice, because it gave me a little side mystery to work on in my head while I read the book, but it was still irritating.

Normally, a book with this many issues would get less than three stars from me, but this is Dorothy Sayers, who can do no wrong in my eyes. And the reason for this is, even if the mystery is confusing and dull, it's still being investigated by Lord Peter, who continues to delight in everything he does. Also, Sayers's characters all have a working knowledge of detective stories and their tropes, and the genius of Sayers is that she has her characters point out how well they're fulfilling these common tropes throughout the investigation. It's very meta, and very amusing:

"'They want to find the last person who saw the man alive,' said Wimsey, promptly. 'It's always done. It's part of the regular show. You get it in all the mystery stories. Of course, the last person to see him never commits the crime. That would make it too easy. One of these days I shall write a book in which two men are seen to walk down a cul-de-sac, and there is a shot and one man is found murdered and the other runs away with a gun in his hand, and after twenty chapters stinking with red herrings, it turns out that the man with the gun did it after all.'"

You can't not love that. In fact, I'm going to now disregard the review format completely and just post a bunch of delightful Peter Wimsey quotes from this book, because that's really the best part. Enjoy the delight of Lord Peter Wimsey...

Discussing his particular method of detecting:

"An official personage like you might embarrass them, don't you know, but there's no dignity about me. I'm probably the least awe-inspiring man in Kirkcudbright. I was born looking foolish, and every day in every way I am getting foolisher and foolisher."

Breaking up a bar fight:

"'This won't do,' said Wimsey, 'this isn't the League of Nations. A plague on both your houses! Have a bit of sense.'"

Talking with Bunter, the Alfred to his Batman, after chasing a suspect:

"Somebody's just made a moonlight flitting,' said Wimsey. 'I've been round to tell the police. At least,' he corrected himself, 'not moonlight, because there is no moon; in fact, it's beastly dark and I fell over some confounded steps, but the principle is the same and have you got any arnica?'Bunter's reply was memorable.'My lord, I have already taken upon me, in your lordship's absence, to acquaint Sir Maxwell Jamieson with Mr. Gowan's project of escape. I have every reason to anticipate that he will be detained at Dumfries or Carlisle. If your lordship will kindly remove your garments, I will apply suitable remedies to the contusions.'"

I really liked this little mystery set in Scotland. It may be that I am just fond of Scotland but I found this delightful. First of all, the last place I would have thought to find Lord Peter is fishing in the Highlands. The thought of that alone makes me giggle.

The murder surrounds a disliked artist and five other painter/fishermen are the suspects. It's quite entertaining as Peter makes his way through the conflicting alibis. The ending was a surprise for me.

Lately I've been reading a lot of mysteries. They are a fun way of spending an evening at home when there is nothing good to watch and the secondary literature in my academic discipline begins to seem a little tedious. *The Five Red Herrings* is a fine example of the genre. Unlike other Dorothy Sayers books, the mystery was done in the form of character sketches: every chapter focused on a single character, and the chapters were even named after the theme character, and the style of writing chanLately I've been reading a lot of mysteries. They are a fun way of spending an evening at home when there is nothing good to watch and the secondary literature in my academic discipline begins to seem a little tedious. *The Five Red Herrings* is a fine example of the genre. Unlike other Dorothy Sayers books, the mystery was done in the form of character sketches: every chapter focused on a single character, and the chapters were even named after the theme character, and the style of writing changes in many of them to reflect the person that Sayers is describing. I think I saw a movie of the book a few years ago, and it completely skipped this important structural element. I suppose Sayers got the idea to do this from the premise: the five red herrings seems to suggest multiple takes on the same situation. Admittedly, some of these takes were not as well done as others, and some chapters didn't carry out the large scale trends, but it seemed an interesting approach to a murder mystery. The story was also structured sort of like a fugue, except with contrasting motifs, that all reach a climax in the later chapters where you get multiple stories and multiple names in the chapter titles. I also really liked the opening: the fact that Sayers deliberately withheld the key fact, which even though I vaguely guessed it (I can't give up on a challenge!), added a sort of excitement to the book, since I was strongly motivated to find out if I was right. I also admit that I liked the Scottish setting, the fact that it involved painters (how many murder mysteries are there of painters?), and the key clue was unique, and the fact that it was so ingeniously constructed. I mean it takes real skill to come up with a plot that is so complicated, so consistent, and allows at least four or five equally persuasive versions of events. It is masterful. The only qualm I might have is that it doesn't emphasize any of the standard relationships that one finds in Sayers' books: Bunter and Wimsey, Harriet Vane and Whimsey, and it is even lacking some of the relationships within the Wimsey family, all things that most Sayers fans probably depend upon. But I suppose that this added a certain charm. Like Jane Austen's *Mansfield Park* it is a different sort of Sayers, and variety, after all, is the spice of life....more

Five Red Herrings was probably my least favourite of the Wimsey books, and I found it rather infuriating as a radioplay, too. One entire episode was given over to people all expounding wrong theories about the murderer -- theories which I knew to be wrong. The end of the episode, where Peter says they're all wrong, is the highlight of the whole thing, and couldn't come soon enough.

The mystery itself is interesting, but far too convoluted.

The casting was pretty good, though I missed Gabriel WolfFive Red Herrings was probably my least favourite of the Wimsey books, and I found it rather infuriating as a radioplay, too. One entire episode was given over to people all expounding wrong theories about the murderer -- theories which I knew to be wrong. The end of the episode, where Peter says they're all wrong, is the highlight of the whole thing, and couldn't come soon enough.

1931, #6 Lord Peter Wimsey, on holiday in Scotland, apa SUSPICIOUS CHARACTERS; an artists' colony in a wee town in Scotland is filled with odd stories, peculiar alibis, and confused police after the most unliked man in town gets himself messily murdered whilst painting a landscape. Classic timetable plot with a peculiar attitude, four stars.

Campbell is a completely unlikable man, the Perfect Victim - a murder just waiting to happen! He makes himself thoroughly unpleasant quite regularly in the l1931, #6 Lord Peter Wimsey, on holiday in Scotland, apa SUSPICIOUS CHARACTERS; an artists' colony in a wee town in Scotland is filled with odd stories, peculiar alibis, and confused police after the most unliked man in town gets himself messily murdered whilst painting a landscape. Classic timetable plot with a peculiar attitude, four stars.

Campbell is a completely unlikable man, the Perfect Victim - a murder just waiting to happen! He makes himself thoroughly unpleasant quite regularly in the little fishing town/artist's colony of Kirkcudbright, and does so once too often one dark night. Having gone on a bender, the alcohol brings out simply the worst of his irascible and somewhat ugly personality and he manages to totally infuriate most of his almost-friends and artists. One of them kills him, but there's a lot that happens in little Kirkcudbright that night, with the murder only the capping stone of "business".

I'm currently in the process of rereading several of my favorite "Golden Age of Detection" female authors' work, and while it's been about twenty years since I last read this one and didn't remember much of the actual plot, what I *did* remember, or thought I had, was that this was THE most boring of Sayers' books. She's always been one of my all-time favorite authors, and I wasn't really looking forward to it, but since I'm OCD and this one was next in sequence, well...

There are lots of reviews that will mention right off the top that "all the train business" was boring, and it is. And downright annoying, which it was. BUT. But. I think this novel is a great big joke on Sayers part, a satire of popular detective novel styles of the period. She was definitely "having us on", kwim?

This novel may have been the result of one of those dinners where several mystery/suspense writers/friends gather together, and after a few drinks begin to argue, and perhaps bet with each other. And somebody says that the optimum number of definite suspects in a mystery novel ought not be any more than two or three at any given time, and that it would make the story unworkable if there were more than that. And Sayers decided (or maybe there was a bet...) to write a mystery with not three, not four, but at least five definite "main suspects", and "make it work".

And it *does*, although the train stuff drove me mad (grin). And it does sort of stun the reader into missing several important bits of information (very necessary...). The first two-thirds of the novel are somewhat stodgy, although the pacing is actually rather sharp - all that timetable stuff overwhelms the reader, and you don't at first realize what's happening - the night-and-day after the murder is a damnably busy one for a sleepy little town! The alibis are all mixed up - most of the suspects don't have any, several sort-of do, one guy has far, far too many alibis... etc.

It isn't until you get to the last third or so of the novel, when The Authorities and Lord Peter set out to "reconstruct the crime" and each does so. Wimsey elects to reconstruct every happening of the night and day in a particularly splashy fashion, involving all the local bigwigs and policemen (!) into participating in various roles of suspects, murderee and murderer. Totally ludicrous IF you're wanting something believable, but entirely fun if you're watching how Sayers weaves her story. She takes the "gather all the suspects" sort of ending scene and spins it out over the last four chapters, throws in a rehash of the plot just previous to this as each policeman/VIP gives *their* impression/reconstruction of the crime, and then has Wimsey show them how it really was done, by actually, physically, reconstructing the crime!

It's a classic format but twisted, and her execution is brilliant, simply brilliant. And a heckuva lot of fun, IMO. Sayers obviously had a good time working this one out, and I had a good time (at the end, anyway) going along for the ride. Can't give it five stars, though, because all the timetable stuff is SO ubiquitous. And pretty nearly all the dialogue is written "in dialect" and it's eNORmously annoying! (Pet Peeve of mine, it mightn't bother you as much). Although both things might just have been Sayers' way of seeing just how far she could spin those then-very-popular elements out in a novel - it's way, way over-the-top, and readers of the period would likely have recognized this by the time they got almost to the end. Actually, this novel has far, far too much of pretty nearly *everything* then considered necessary for a "good" (or maybe "popular") mystery novel. And that was quite deliberate on Sayers' part.

BOTTOM LINE: Don't let its reputation or the timetable elements bother/worry you, skip over them if you must - it won't damage your enjoyment of the plot very much. Get yourself familiar with the Dramatis Personae and then carefully read the last half/third of the novel closely. It's well worth it. Recommended only for those with an odd sense of humor, and a good deal of patience, but it's worthwhile working your way to the end.

[NOTE: I number a series of novels only, not including the short story collections, thus this is the sixth novel although GR shows it as #7]...more

Meh. I am told Sayers wrote this at a time when railroad timetable mysteries were popular, just to prove she could. I believe it. Basically, the first half of the book features Lord Peter and all the policemen going through all the permutations of Scotland's mindboggling train schedule, as well as six suspects who are barely distinguishable from each other. During the second half, the plot really picks up, and we finally get a little characterisation of each of the suspects, as well as some muchMeh. I am told Sayers wrote this at a time when railroad timetable mysteries were popular, just to prove she could. I believe it. Basically, the first half of the book features Lord Peter and all the policemen going through all the permutations of Scotland's mindboggling train schedule, as well as six suspects who are barely distinguishable from each other. During the second half, the plot really picks up, and we finally get a little characterisation of each of the suspects, as well as some much-needed plot not involving trains or bicycles. Unfortunately, this leads the reader to hope and even assume that the solution will be surprising and fresh. Sadly, that hope is dashed. And there are only approximately two scenes of Lord Peter being awesome. He's just... there for the most part. Quite disappointing.

What I liked was the method of concealing the fact of murder, which was, frankly, ingenious. I think the book would have benefited from making that part of the speculation....more

Some bits of this were funny and just perfectly Peter Wimsey-ical. But a lot of it was routine painstaking working out of timetables and alibis and who was lying when and about what. It doesn't help that one rather feels that the murdered man deserved it, and the suspects don't. Or that the dialogue is mostly written with a stab at phonetically spelling out the Scottish accent/dialect. It's hard to read, and it isn't terribly rewarding, allow the last fifty pages or so is wonderful.

There isn't eSome bits of this were funny and just perfectly Peter Wimsey-ical. But a lot of it was routine painstaking working out of timetables and alibis and who was lying when and about what. It doesn't help that one rather feels that the murdered man deserved it, and the suspects don't. Or that the dialogue is mostly written with a stab at phonetically spelling out the Scottish accent/dialect. It's hard to read, and it isn't terribly rewarding, allow the last fifty pages or so is wonderful.

There isn't enough of any of the characters one cares about, and actually, if I were rereading the series some time in a couple of years, my advice to myself would be to skip this one, or just read the last fifty pages.

The part where it doesn't tell you what Wimsey found, or rather, didn't find, is infuriating. If you're an artist who works with paints, you'll know. If you don't, you'll go most of the book without knowing. Infuriating!...more

This is my first read of Sayers and her Lord Peter Wimsey and i can see why the series,the character is still read decades after. Wimsey was a good,smart detective without overdoing it and more important he had a humorous side, a personality that was fun to read. Sayers prose, style specially early in the novel was impressive, the strengths of the book.

The weakness of the novel was the detective story when dealing with police detectives. Also she overdid with the too detailed,over-thought wild tThis is my first read of Sayers and her Lord Peter Wimsey and i can see why the series,the character is still read decades after. Wimsey was a good,smart detective without overdoing it and more important he had a humorous side, a personality that was fun to read. Sayers prose, style specially early in the novel was impressive, the strengths of the book.

The weakness of the novel was the detective story when dealing with police detectives. Also she overdid with the too detailed,over-thought wild theories that went on for pages and then was dismissed as a red herring. Lord Wimsey ended the case well but it was a bit uneven novel,story overall.

It was a good tryout of the series and a very fun character to read so i look forward to reading the more famous, acclaimed novels of the series. ...more

This is a difficult book to read, and I would recommend starting out with a notebook and pencil to follow events.An aggressive and unpleasant artist is found dead by a burn in Scotland. Lord Peter Wimsey enters the scene and decides that it is a murder. Dorothy Sayers lets her readers know that at the scene there is a clue to be identified. This is reinforced later on and it is easy to identify the culprit if one does not get bamboozled by railway timetables. There are six artist suspects, but fThis is a difficult book to read, and I would recommend starting out with a notebook and pencil to follow events.An aggressive and unpleasant artist is found dead by a burn in Scotland. Lord Peter Wimsey enters the scene and decides that it is a murder. Dorothy Sayers lets her readers know that at the scene there is a clue to be identified. This is reinforced later on and it is easy to identify the culprit if one does not get bamboozled by railway timetables. There are six artist suspects, but five red herrings. There are also five policemen with their own theories who could also be 'red herrings'.

I suppose a touch of nostalgia creeps in, because this is a period when apparently trains ran to time, porters were obliging, and cars travelling at 35 m.p.h. were fast. But I found the travelling schedules of all the suspects and those bicycles very, very confusing, and boring....more

Ahh, this one was so boring! Most of the book is theories about what COULD have happened in excruciating detail. And it's set in Scotland and the Scots dialogue is written out, which I find very hard to read. And there are far too many new characters! I could not keep track of them.

This one was difficult in a way I didn't except : the Scottish accent in print. It definitely adds colours and atmosphere but it's a pain to read. The whole five of the six suspects are red herring is interesting but gets a bit muddle near the end. The culprit is found and the police is told in a exquisite reenactment (we are in 1931) that includes missed trains, wayward bicycles and second breakfast. Still, Sayers more average work is better than most mystery novels.

I absolutely adore Dorothy Sayers, but sometimes her plots get a overly detailed and technical. This book suffered from an abundance of train schedules and a severe shortage of Bunter, the world's greatest manservant. Still a good read, though.

I have a subscription to Mystery Magazine and they had an article about quintessential British mystery writers. One of them was Dorothy Sayers who I vaguely remembered my father enjoying so I thought I'd read one and randomly chose The Five Red Herrings. The main character of this series is Lord Peter Wimsey who, rather in the fashion of Hercule Poirot, uses his gray cells to solve mysteries. Lord Wimsey is much more active however and loves to recreate the crimes rather as a play. This mysteryI have a subscription to Mystery Magazine and they had an article about quintessential British mystery writers. One of them was Dorothy Sayers who I vaguely remembered my father enjoying so I thought I'd read one and randomly chose The Five Red Herrings. The main character of this series is Lord Peter Wimsey who, rather in the fashion of Hercule Poirot, uses his gray cells to solve mysteries. Lord Wimsey is much more active however and loves to recreate the crimes rather as a play. This mystery takes place in Scotland and involves the murder of an artist. All the suspects are fellow artists who are all well known to each other. Wimsey "helps the authorities in their investigation" by interviewing all the suspects in a "good old boy" fashion. There is a lot of attention to detail and running timelines for each suspect. The action is minimal and is centered around the recreation of the crime and where each suspects was during the important time periods. While I enjoyed the book, it was slow and sometimes repetitive compared to modern mysteries. Enjoy it for a nostalgic look back at early mysteries....more

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it,
click here.I do think this was really good as a mystery puzzle -- at least, I think it was good, but I think the proper way to appreciate it is to play along, write all the clues down, make one's own railway schedule charts and so on, but both times I've read this book I've been too impatient for that. I think that if I had, the part at the end in which the investigators go through six different theories would have been fun. I could have compared my own notes and seen if I'd thought of everything. But as II do think this was really good as a mystery puzzle -- at least, I think it was good, but I think the proper way to appreciate it is to play along, write all the clues down, make one's own railway schedule charts and so on, but both times I've read this book I've been too impatient for that. I think that if I had, the part at the end in which the investigators go through six different theories would have been fun. I could have compared my own notes and seen if I'd thought of everything. But as I didn't, I admit to skipping that part this time around.

I can't decide whether the Missing Object was a clever idea, or too much of a tease. I did have fun with it -- I nearly guessed what it was on my first read, and remembered on my second, and enjoyed all the little hints that Sayers puts throughout the text -- but is it really fair for a novelist to do that?

Really my main objection to the story is that characters aren't very interesting. Wimsey is on holiday away from his usual friends. Bunter accompanies him of course, and Parker gets an appearance, but nobody else does, so there's a sad lack of Miss Climpson, for instance.

I often love Sayers' minor female characters, but not in this one -- there are a couple of painters whom I liked well enough, but didn't have much to do, and then there's Gilda Farren.

Perhaps I would be more sympathetic to Sayers' depiction of Mrs. Farren if I'd been a contemporary. I suspect she was inspired by people Sayers knew -- people who adhered wholeheartedly to a sort of William Morris or Pre-Raphaelite aesthetic. Mrs. Farren is very Arts & Crafts-y (she spins and weaves) and wants everyone to be calm and high-minded. Apparently in her case, this indicates arrogance and unwillingness to relate properly to more emotionally turbulent people. Wimsey accuses her of remaining faithful to her husband out of pride -- not so much because she loves Mr. Farren, but because it would wound her self-image to commit adultery. (I remember seeing this idea in C.S. Lewis's writing.)

Mr. Farren is one of those emotionally turbulent people. He adores his wife, but doesn't seem to understand quite how she works, and he's furious that she allows an unpleasant man (the murder victim, in fact) to spend time with her. Mrs. Farren explains that there's no romance between her and Mr. Campbell, but that she thinks spending time in her quiet sitting room might do him good. She is upset that Mr. Farren won't trust her, but saying this only makes him angrier; he shouts and swears at her, and leaves the house, saying he'll kill Mr. Campbell and himself; and he doesn't come back for days.

When I read this, my sympathy is wholly with Gilda Farren. I think it's horrible that someone should be so jealous over a wife's male acquaintance, and I don't think it was Mrs. Farren's duty to accommodate herself to her husband's violent anger.

Yet, when Wimsey catches up with Mr. Farren, he finds him escaped not from murder but from his wife. He's wandering the countryside with a small bag, a false name, and no attachments, painting inn signs for bed and board. The reader is supposed to sympathize with Mr. Farren and be disappointed when he can't prolong this holiday, but must return to his ordinary life with Mrs. Farren. We even get prison metaphors in which Mrs. Farren is the prison guard.

Look, Mr. Farren is a grown man and capable of taking care of himself. I have absolutely no sympathy for a subplot in which, finding himself incoherently dissatisfied with his life, he runs away and embraces a carefree itinerant lifestyle, and in which Mrs. Farren is the villain. If living with Mrs. Farren isn't good for Mr. Farren, he ought to clearly realize this for himself and leave her on purpose in a responsible manner. I can't believe that Mrs. Farren is as sinister and secretly powerful as Sayers paints her, or that Mr. Farren is or ought to be a man-child free of responsibility.

[Here's my review from when I read The Five Red Herrings the first time, in 2011, before I joined Goodreads: "[this] is the one with all the train schedules that shouldn't be the first Lord Peter book you start with, unless you're the kind of mystery fan who really likes train schedules. I do not know how it measures up as a train schedule mystery, because I let Wimsey figure all of those clues out for me.

"The "red herrings" are the five innocent men out of the six Wimsey has identified as suspects. What makes this a difficult mystery is that all of them have terrible or nonexistent alibis, good motives, and the technical ability to commit the crime. The problem is that, while Sayers does her best to make each of the six suspects different and interesting, they are initially quite similar (they're all white male painters) and it takes a lot of the book just to convey enough information so that the reader can tell them apart.

"There are two very appealing girl characters, who appear only briefly, and two women characters, who are rather awful."]...more

Yikes. I love Lord Peter, but this might well be Sayers' worst effort.

Five Red Herrings has a lovely setting, taking place in Galloway. The characters are nicely penned, with an affectionate look at Scotland's dogged policemen and the recalcitrant local artists and fishermen whose obstinate refusal to tell the truth prevents them from serving justice.

However, the plot is weak, repetitive and dull. Unless you are obsessed with train tickets, schedules and the minutiae of bicycle speeds, modelsYikes. I love Lord Peter, but this might well be Sayers' worst effort.

Five Red Herrings has a lovely setting, taking place in Galloway. The characters are nicely penned, with an affectionate look at Scotland's dogged policemen and the recalcitrant local artists and fishermen whose obstinate refusal to tell the truth prevents them from serving justice.

However, the plot is weak, repetitive and dull. Unless you are obsessed with train tickets, schedules and the minutiae of bicycle speeds, models and tire treads, you should likely avoid this.

The retelling of the story of the murder happens so often that one would suspect that Campbell was killed on Groundhog Day. Seriously, six investigations of six suspects is WAY too many. Even the 1985 movie Clue had only 3 alternate endings. This book comes perilously close to being a Choose Your Own Adventure novel.

Then, to make sure the horse has really been flogged properly, every person who worked on solving the case gets to present their opinions on how the murder was carried out - nobody agrees on a suspect, of course - and then Lord Peter, comparing himself once again to Sherlock Holmes, comes up with the somewhat unlikely solution, pulling two rabbits out of his hat to make his case.

My boyfriend, hearing me moan about how painfully long and boring the audiobook was, asked: "Who did it, the painter?" I groaned out loud. "They're ALL painters! I can't tell who's who anymore!" Lack of differentiation between suspects annoys me. When Chapter Seven arrived, I felt certain I had reached the end. Nope. Three chapters left... Zzz.

Struggling to the end, I waited for the whodunnit. Reenactment of the crime was slightly more interesting than the rest, but utterly unbelievable (no police department would agree to such shenanigans).

I give this a pass. Do yourself a favour: skip over this hot mess to the next book, "Have His Carcase". She wrote that in 1932, the year my Dad was born. It's a much better mystery. You'll enjoy it more, I promise....more

This is an example of the police procedural at its most plodding and colorful characterization at its finest. The book takes place in the artist's colony at Galloway district of Scotland in 1930-ish (book published in 1931). An artist is found dead and, as the title indicates, there are six suspects of whom five are "red herrings". Missing suspects, stolen bicycles, Scottish train schedules, and lying witnesses move suspicion from one suspect to the other and back again throughout the book. SayeThis is an example of the police procedural at its most plodding and colorful characterization at its finest. The book takes place in the artist's colony at Galloway district of Scotland in 1930-ish (book published in 1931). An artist is found dead and, as the title indicates, there are six suspects of whom five are "red herrings". Missing suspects, stolen bicycles, Scottish train schedules, and lying witnesses move suspicion from one suspect to the other and back again throughout the book. Sayers withholds from the reader none of the evidence pointing to the murderer. It’s up to the reader and Lord Peter to discern the true trail from the false.

You can skip through the book blithely skimming the details of train schedules, ignoring the nuance of Scot's dialect, and bothering not to puzzle out alibis, lies and misdirection while enjoying Lord Peter's romp through bohemian artists’ society. If you take the time to check the maps, understand the intricacies of daily train service in the 1930s, and parse out the movements of the main players, you may be able to uncover the murderer along with Lord Peter.

Bunter, always in the background providing the firm foundation which allows Lord Peter to sally forth on detection, makes but a brief yet vital appearance.

I have two complaints with this particular edition. The map is a blur. And on at least one page, page 45, several sentences were omitted.

As always the novels reflects the 1930s English society of their setting....more

Och aye, laddie, ye be havin' Lord Peter Whimsey in Scotland wi' the dialog all in dialect, ye see. An' they all be painters an' fishermen wi' their little crochets an' follies, but tha one thing they can all agree on is they hates this lad Campbell and they all wants him dead.

Well, there be six lads could hae done tha dirty deed, besides tourists an' brogan salesman wandering through to muddy tha waters a wee bit mair. That's one lad guilty a' foul murder an' five lookin' guilty but hae nothin'Och aye, laddie, ye be havin' Lord Peter Whimsey in Scotland wi' the dialog all in dialect, ye see. An' they all be painters an' fishermen wi' their little crochets an' follies, but tha one thing they can all agree on is they hates this lad Campbell and they all wants him dead.

Well, there be six lads could hae done tha dirty deed, besides tourists an' brogan salesman wandering through to muddy tha waters a wee bit mair. That's one lad guilty a' foul murder an' five lookin' guilty but hae nothin' ta do with the crime, these bein' the five red herrings of the title.

Mr. Alpha, he looks like he might hae done it, but he'd have had to take the 3:15 to Edinburgh to catch tha 4:45 train to London via Inver Brass, an' everyone knows that it's Tuesday and the local stops three times along the way for milk, so he canna make it to Edinburgh in time. For a while it looks like he might hae caught the 2:21 express to Galway, but what about the bicycle?

An Mr. Beta was seen on the 12:30 to Mauch Chonk, where he might hae caught the 12:55 to Glasgow and then to the ferry to Ireland in time to come back through Liverpool the next day, if the train ran on time to the minute, but he was seen ridin' a bicycle on the high road and he'd hae only ten minutes to get to tha station, unless there was a bus along that road. Was there? Did anyone see a mysterious stranger with a beard and cape on the bus that day?

Mr. Charlie is a tough case, since he could hae took the 3:45 to the 4:47 and then the 5:50 toward London but get off at Tilbury to catch the express back to Glasgow and then the 7:00 train back to Edinburgh, the 7:45 bus to Loch Lomond- not sure whether he would take the high road or the low road, but that be neither here nor there- where he might bicycle across country to do the dirty deed, return in time for the 4:43 AM milk train to the main line and get on the express THE NEXT MORNING in time to appear at the art show, if all the connections were right, but there's the matter of the return ticket that was turned in for the 8:40 from Leeds. Everyone knows that train usually runs three minutes 45 seconds late, which means he couldn't possibly have made that connection unless there was a strong crosswind and the bonnie blue flag was actually purple, which means Furgeson is on duty as engineer, and on a good day he will make up twelve and a half seconds a mile on the downgrades, so they might hae made it, except on Thursdays during the holiday season.

Mr Delta could hae made it straight, except as we all know the Eastern Highlands Short Line has a misprint in the schedule, so he would hae arrived one minute thirteen and a half seconds late for the 4:45, which might hae something to do wi' tha stranger who hired a car at Glenbormie and drove lak the devil to the flag station down the way that morning an run over three of MacGregor's prize chickens, but then why did he drive down the side lane to the abandoned lead mine? 'Tis confusin. If the Eastern Highlands Short Line would just proofread their schedule it would make things easier for everyone!

Och, Laddie, I been rattlin' on, and I have to be goin' if I'm to catch the 1:23 to the 2:30 at Glasgow to Edinburgh in time for the 3:45 to Northumbria to catch the 4:45 to London to connect via the London and West Railway at 9:00 to Liverpool for the haggis hurlin' and bagpipe festival. Suffice it to say that if you like murder and train schedules, this be the book for you....more

05/01/2012 This is not my favorite Wimsey mystery, but I do thoroughly enjoy it. The alibis hinge on a great deal of cleverness with trains and schedules, but since I don't care much for deciphering those sort of things, I tend to skim (or skip entire) over those bits in favor of Wimsey being brilliant. Perhaps my favorite bit is when Wimsey ren-enacts the murder, complete with a corpse (not a real corpse, but someone standing in for it) to prove that his theory will work. A good, solid mystery05/01/2012 This is not my favorite Wimsey mystery, but I do thoroughly enjoy it. The alibis hinge on a great deal of cleverness with trains and schedules, but since I don't care much for deciphering those sort of things, I tend to skim (or skip entire) over those bits in favor of Wimsey being brilliant. Perhaps my favorite bit is when Wimsey ren-enacts the murder, complete with a corpse (not a real corpse, but someone standing in for it) to prove that his theory will work. A good, solid mystery and more fun with Wimsey.

07/2013 The truth is that one can never have enough Wimsey, and since Sayers is no longer writing mysteries, one must make do by reading them over and over again. ...more

Here Sayers writes her first worthy novel -- in my opinion, of course.

The puzzle is done well in an old school sense. Think Christie. We have six closed suspects - some telling the truth, some lying, some doing both of these to suit their needs. The situation is set up well enough and it is relatively more exciting at the beginning than a murder depending on a rich relative's will or something in that vein. A painter is killed and made to look as if he had an accident while painting something clHere Sayers writes her first worthy novel -- in my opinion, of course.

The puzzle is done well in an old school sense. Think Christie. We have six closed suspects - some telling the truth, some lying, some doing both of these to suit their needs. The situation is set up well enough and it is relatively more exciting at the beginning than a murder depending on a rich relative's will or something in that vein. A painter is killed and made to look as if he had an accident while painting something close to a precipitous drop. The business about trains and time schedules is a bit overdone to my mind, but I understand that kind of thing was popular back when this book came out. I can overlook it. Red herrings are used in a competent way and not just thrown in for the sake of being thrown in -- for instance, the bit about the man with the beard fits into the reality of the overall story and murder. It's not just an unnecessary side story to throw you off the wrong track.

But, purely as a puzzle, Christie does better with this kind of set-up.

The reason why I think it is one of her best so far is how this puzzle is mixed in with all of this wonderful self-reference. This is about a group of painters - people who have to interpret the world around them to get a representation of it on to a canvas. Furthermore, these folks tell their stories (for the most part) that reflect personal lies and a sense of bias. But there's more! We have a murderer who gets an idea from another mystery book of the day (actually quoted here -- "The Two Tickets Problem") and uses that to carry out his murder/alibi. Another book that clearly inspired this (Freeman Crofts' "John Magill") has a couple of mentions in the plot too. Not enough? What about the talk where everybody (our representatives in the text) have their own spins on what happen -- a clear acknowledgement of the puzzle and how a story is constantly changed and re-invented to find the truth. And the icing on the cake? The murderer is convinced to talk after the murder itself is re-enacted in the book itself! This conceit can also be found in an early Poirot book - Blue Train - but here it is done well too.

On a more minor note, I think the sense of place is wonderfully evoked here. Having been to Scotland personally for a couple of months, I am always longing to go back in the future and see the countryside there again if the opportunity arises. I thought it a very beautiful country and it was especially peaceful out there closer to Stirling. I envy those Scots their country in some ways - nothing but bunches of ugly strip malls and stretches of road where I grew up in the States. For any natural beauty you had to travel an hour or so by car to see it.

There are some downsides to the book, of course. The Scottish dialect in print is a bit of a hang-up. The travelling Jewish salesman is too blatantly offensive even in an age when it was more acceptable. Some, like me, who are not prone to remember every last detail will find the discussions of trains and timetables and what the dead artist doesn't have at the time of discovery of his death a bit abstruse. Here those small details really do matter. In fact, it's one of those small facts that suggests a solution to Wimsey in the first place.

So, the short version: I really like this and I hear she has written better novels after this. On to the next one then!

Dorothy L. Sayers put a lot of effort into "The Five Red Herrings." First, if the Foreword is to be believed, she's reproduced the areas of Gatehouse and Kirkcudbright (places, trains, landscapes) in tremendous detail. Then, there are the suspects. All six of them. Each with their own stories, tracking them down, and their alibis. Ditto, the trains. My goodness, the trains. Almost all of the tracking and alibis revolve around the trains and she provides all the details about their movement. PlusDorothy L. Sayers put a lot of effort into "The Five Red Herrings." First, if the Foreword is to be believed, she's reproduced the areas of Gatehouse and Kirkcudbright (places, trains, landscapes) in tremendous detail. Then, there are the suspects. All six of them. Each with their own stories, tracking them down, and their alibis. Ditto, the trains. My goodness, the trains. Almost all of the tracking and alibis revolve around the trains and she provides all the details about their movement. Plus, she's given just about everyone a different accent (very humorous at times). And, don't forget all the information on painting and fishing. It's extremely true to life and interesting. Unfortunately, all of that adds up to the reason I dropped my rating by one star to a "mere" Very Good 4 stars out of 5: there's so much extraneous material that you just give up trying to figure out what's going on and merely ride along as an observer. Specifically, there's just no way that I could keep track of the stories of six different possible perpetrators and their movements across all those trains and landscape. But, I'll admit that even though I couldn't keep track of everything, the mystery, itself, and how Wimsey solves it are excellent. Highly recommended.

Note: my numbering differs from Amazon's because they include collections of short stories whereas my list is just of novels. Also, I can only include 10 links in the review, so the 11th Wimsey book is just a title....more

In correct Peter Wimsey order this is my least favourite so far. Wimsey is always entertaining but he hardly shows up in the first two thirds, and the parts where he does are the best by far. Too many policemen P.O.Vs, similar suspects and train times to really engage. The excellent way of proving the murder saves this one from boringness - the last few chapters are much more enjoyable.

It turns out that train time tables are so boring that not even a great writing like Dorothy Sayers can make them interesting.

Let me give you a fictional paragraph that could have been included in the book to give you an idea of the tedious and confusing-ness of train time tables in all their boring glory:

"It turns out the Chamley was on the 1.5 to Ayers when we thought he was on the 1.41 to Allen even though his wife found a ticket for the 2.5, which was hard to believe because the train onlyIt turns out that train time tables are so boring that not even a great writing like Dorothy Sayers can make them interesting.

Let me give you a fictional paragraph that could have been included in the book to give you an idea of the tedious and confusing-ness of train time tables in all their boring glory:

"It turns out the Chamley was on the 1.5 to Ayers when we thought he was on the 1.41 to Allen even though his wife found a ticket for the 2.5, which was hard to believe because the train only ran at 1.3, 1.4, or 1.7 except on Sunday when it ran at 2.1 but stopped at Averrs and Arreys or on Wednesdays when it ran at 1.8 and 1.9. His neighbor Cunnley ran into Miss Bev and Miss Bav on the 1.1 from Ayers stopping in Allen..."

The moral lesson I would like everyone to take away from this review is that train time tables are boring. Painfully boring. So boring that it brings me to tears faster than that scene in Heidi when they take her from her grandfather. ...more

Lord Peter Wimsey is visiting an artist community in Scotland and, of course, someone is murdered. He gets pulled into the investigation. 6 people are possible suspects. This novel involves trying to figure out the schedule and timeline for each suspect and figure out who does it. It involves lots of train schedules and times. Very interesting differences in speech patterns here. Scots all talk a different accent from Lord Peter and other English. Also--there is a memorable speech from a witnessLord Peter Wimsey is visiting an artist community in Scotland and, of course, someone is murdered. He gets pulled into the investigation. 6 people are possible suspects. This novel involves trying to figure out the schedule and timeline for each suspect and figure out who does it. It involves lots of train schedules and times. Very interesting differences in speech patterns here. Scots all talk a different accent from Lord Peter and other English. Also--there is a memorable speech from a witness with a lisp. Love Lord Peter and his mind and his humor. This one was a bit more complicated, but still great....more

I was looking forward to reading this as Sayers is much admired. However, I found this a real struggle to get through. I found Peter Wimsey intensely annoying. He was all jolly hockey sticks and I'm not sure why the Scottish policemen were so willing to put up with him. At the beginning, I quite enjoyed trying to work out which artist was to blame and which alibi would prove untrue. However, I don't think there was anyway to work out the solution here because it was ridiculously convoluted. I foI was looking forward to reading this as Sayers is much admired. However, I found this a real struggle to get through. I found Peter Wimsey intensely annoying. He was all jolly hockey sticks and I'm not sure why the Scottish policemen were so willing to put up with him. At the beginning, I quite enjoyed trying to work out which artist was to blame and which alibi would prove untrue. However, I don't think there was anyway to work out the solution here because it was ridiculously convoluted. I found the six possible culprits were difficult to separate from each other and the writing out of various schedules was tedious. The ending was not exciting and it didn't seem in the least convincing or realistic. Ultimately disappointing....more

Ugh. I picked this up because I needed a break from The Singapore Grip and its endless discussions of markets and rubber plantations. I love Lord Peter Wimsy, but there were WAY too many bicycles and train timetables involved and too much indecipherable Scottish dialogue. The chapter where each of the police officers elaborate their theories of the crime was painful.

(view spoiler)[Also, not that I realized this until I had painfully plowed my way through half of the book, but towards the beginnUgh. I picked this up because I needed a break from The Singapore Grip and its endless discussions of markets and rubber plantations. I love Lord Peter Wimsy, but there were WAY too many bicycles and train timetables involved and too much indecipherable Scottish dialogue. The chapter where each of the police officers elaborate their theories of the crime was painful.

(view spoiler)[Also, not that I realized this until I had painfully plowed my way through half of the book, but towards the beginning, Lord Peter compiles a list of five suspects which -- in conjunction with the title -- is a major clue. Maybe the book was purposely stuffed with dense timetables and what not so that the reader's brain gets so fogged, they won't realize five suspects were virtually eliminated in the third chapter. (hide spoiler)]

Dorothy Leigh Sayers (Oxford, 13 June 1893 – Witham, 17 December 1957) was a renowned British author, translator, student of classical and modern languages, and Christian humanist.

Dorothy L. Sayers is best known for her mysteries, a series of novels and short stories set between World War I and World War II that feature English aristocrat and amateur sleuth Lord Peter Wimsey. However, Sayers herseDorothy Leigh Sayers (Oxford, 13 June 1893 – Witham, 17 December 1957) was a renowned British author, translator, student of classical and modern languages, and Christian humanist.

Dorothy L. Sayers is best known for her mysteries, a series of novels and short stories set between World War I and World War II that feature English aristocrat and amateur sleuth Lord Peter Wimsey. However, Sayers herself considered her translation of Dante's Divina Commedia to be her best work. She is also known for her plays and essays....more

“Still, it doesn't do to murder people, no matter how offensive they may be.”
—
47 likes

“I think the most joyous thing in life is to loaf around and watch another bloke do a job of work. Look how popular are the men who dig up London with electric drills. Duke's son, cook's son, son of a hundred kings, people will stand there for hours on end, ear drums splitting. Why? Simply for the pleasure of being idle while watching other people work.”
—
7 likes